58th Congress, I HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. \ Document 
3d Sessiofi. i } No. 385. 



EXTENSION AND COMPLETION 

OF THE 

CAPITOL BUILDING. 



U.s.v 
REPORT OF THE JOINT COMMISSION. 



March 3, 1905.— Referred to the Committee 

on Appropriations and ordered 

to be printed. 



WASHINGTON: 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 

1905. 



y 



c 



r\ c. 



S'i 



11 JAM 1906 
B. of 0. 



EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE 
CAPITOL BUILDING. 



-Ir. Hepburn, from the Joint Commission, submitted the following 

REPORT. 

[Relative to plans for the extension and completion of the Capitol building.] 

The Joint Commission established by the suudrv civil act of April 
^8, 1904, to inquire and report on plans for the extension and comple- 
t-on of the Capitol building, beg leave to report. 

The sundrv civil appropriation act of April 28, 1904, contains the 
following provision: 

A joint commission composed of three Senators, namely, Honorable George P. Wet- 
more, of Rhode Island, Honorable Russell A. Alger, of Michigan, and Honorable 
Arthur P. (jorman, of Maryland, and three members of the House of Representatives 
of the Fifty-eighth Congress, namely. Honorable Joseph G. Cannon, of Illinois, Honor- 
able William P. Hepburn, of Iowa, and Honorable James D. Richardson, of Tennes- 
see, which is hereby created, is authorized to inquire and report to Congress at its 
next session plans in detail and estimates of cost for the extension and completion of 
the Capitol building, in accordance with the original plans therefor by the late Thomas 
U. Walter, with such modifications thereof as they may deem advantageous or neces- 
sary, and for each and every purpose connected therewith, including the employment 
of such professional and other services as they may deem requisite, and for such other 
expenses as said joint commission may authorize or incur, there is hereby appropriated 
the sum of fifty thousand dollars, or so much thereof as may be necessary; and the 
Superintendent of the Capitol Building and Grounds, under the direction and super- 
vision of said commission, or such commission as shall be authorized by Congress, shall 
conduct the making of all contracts for said construction, whenever and not l^efore the 
same shall be authorized by Congi-ess, after proper advertisements and the reception 
of bids, and said superintendent, subject to the direction and approval of such com- 
mission, shall employ such professional and personal services in connection with said 
work, when authorized as aforesaid, as may be necessary. Any vacancy occurring by 
resignation or otherwise in the membership of said commission shall be tilled by the 
presiding officer of the Senate or House, according as the vacancy occurs in the Senate 
or House representation on said commission. 

1 



2 EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE CAPITOL BUILDING, 

The Joint Coniinission as conslituted by the act met on April 30, 
1904, and organized by the election of Hon. Georg-e P. Wetmore, 
of Rhode Island, as chairman. 

The tirm of Carrere & Hastings, architects, of New York City, were 
appointed consulting architects to the Joint Commission, with instruc- 
tion to study the problem involved and submit preliminary designs 
and also the necessary complete plans and estimates contemplated in 
the act creating the Joint Commission, the same to be based on the 
plan for an extension of the central east front of the Capitol, designed 
by the late Thomas U. Walter and dated February 20, 1865. 

The consulting architects were also requested to consider and report 
on the question of — 

(1) Refacing with white marble such portions of the present west 
front of the Capitol as are now built in sandstone, preserving the pres- 
ent design; 

(2) Replacing with white marble the two broad flights of terrace 
steps on the west of the Capitol; and 

(3) Placing a sculptural group in the House pediment to correspond 
in character, size, and finish with the sculptural work now existing in 
the pediment of the Senate wing. 

The architects were directed to report as their work progressed, 
and during the past summer and autumn meetings of the Commission 
were hfeld to receive and consider preliminary reports. 

Under authority of the sundry civil act of March 3, 1903, the Super- 
intendent of the Capitol Building and Grounds had constructed a 
plaster model of the Capitol building as it exists to-day, with movable 
sections showing two of the three plans of the late Thomas U. Walter 
for an extension of the central east front. The Commission has had 
constructed in addition models illustrating the designs submitted by 
the consulting architects. 

At a meeting of the Commission on Februar}^ 19, 1905, the con- 
sulting architects submitted their report (Appendix A). They recom- 
mend the adoption of a plan marked "Scheme A"" as being in their 
opinion the most conservative and in every way the best solution of 
the architectural problems involved in correcting the defects of the 
east fayade, to which Mr, Walter called attention in his report of 1865. 

Scheme A provides for moving the entire central east front forward 
only so far as necessary (12 feet 10 inches) to bring the main wall of 
the building at the center, under the extreme projection of the Dome, 
and give the Dome the apparent support which it should have, at 
the same time adding one column on each side of the central pedi- 
ment, broadening the pediment accordingh', so that it will dominate 
the tvvo pediments of the Senate and House wings. It also proposes 
to reproduce the present east front in white marble. In this scheme 
no consideration has been given to increased space within the building. 



EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE CAPITOL BUILDING. 3 

Nevertheless, the moving- oi the Avail easterlv 12 feet 10 inches gives on 
the main floor to the east of the Supreme Court a series of alcoves, 
back of the present screen, for retiring- or robing rooms, and a similar 
series of alcoves to the east of Statuary Hall, as well as on the floor 
above. In the basement this additional projection would add to the 
size of the adjacent rooms, enlarging- and improving them, especially 
in the case of the law librar}', under the Supreme Court. In the 
central section of the building two spacious rooms are obtained on 
either side of the main entrance, with w^indows opening- on the portico, 
g'iving- 12 additional rooms for committee or other purposes, those on 
the first and second floors being- well lighted and all very accessible. 
The estimated cost of Scheme A is |S00,000. 

The architects also submitted an alternative plan, Scheme B, as 
illustrating what they believe to be the least objectionable manner in 
which the central east front can be extended for the purpose of secur- 
ing- any considerable room space within the building-. 

In Scheme B the central portion is projected 32 feet 6 inches easterly 
from the walls of the Supreme Court and Statuary Hall, a wide cor- 
ridor east of the Rotunda, connecting- the Senate and House wings, is 
provided, and the building will gain 54 large rooms, 18 on each of 
the three floors. The estimated cost of Scheme B is -f 1,075,000. 

The Joint Commission recommends the adoption by Congress of — 

(1) Scheme A. as to the extension of the central east front of the 
Capitol: 

(2) xllso recommends the refacing with white marble such portions of 
the present west front as are now built of sandstone, the present design 
to be reproduced in every detail; 

(3) Replacing- with white marble the two broad flights of steps on the 
west of the Capitol from the upper terrace to the foot of the embank- 
ment where the garden begins; and 

(4) Placing- a sculptural group in the House pediment to correspond 
in character, size, and finish with the sculptural work now existing in 
the pediment of the Senate wing. 

The estimated cost will thus be: ' 

East front extension, Scheme A« $800, 000 

Reproducing the west front in white marble 425,000 

Reiiroducing west terrace steps in white marble oO, 000 

Sculptural treatment of the east pediment of the House wing 55, 000 

Total 1, 330, 000 

A statement of the expenses of the Commission to date is attached 
hereto, marked Appendix B. 

Geo. Peabody Wetmore, Chairman. J. G. Cannon. 

R. A. Alger. W. P. Hepburn. 

A: P. Gorman. James D. Richardson. 

« See Appendix A. 



APPENDIX A. 

REPORT OX THE EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE 
UNITED STATES CAPITOL, 1904. 



To the Joint Commission of the Senate and House for the Extension and Completion of the 

United State--< Capitol Building: 

Gentlemen: We feel deeply the responsibility imposed upon us in reporting to 
your Commission in regard to any changes to be made in the Capitol building of the 
United States, a building so interesting from the artistic as well as from the historic 
point of view, and which, though it may have some architectural faults, is, never- 
theless, one of the most monumental and beautiful edifices in this country. We find 
ourselves, therefore, hesitating whether we should advise the reproduction of the 
east front of the building in marble to harmonize with the rest of the Capitol, pre- 
serving the design practically as it exists to-day, or whether we should recommend 
enlarging the building in accordance with Mr. Walter's plans of 1865. 

In his report as ^■^rchitect of the Capitol extension, dated November 1, 1864, he 
states : 

"Now that the new Dome and the wings of the Capitol are approaching comple- 
tion, it must be apparent to everyone that the extension of the center building on 
the east to the line of the new wings becomes an architectural necessity. I have 
therefore prepared plans for thus completing the work in harmony with what has 
already been done, and will place them in the Capitol for future reference. 

" I do not suppose, nor would I recommend, that any action be taken by Congress 
in reference to such an improvement until the war is ended and the financial con- 
dition of the country becomes settled and prosperous; but inasmuch as it is my pur- 
pose to retire from these works as soon as the Dome is finished, I deem it incumbent 
upon me to leave upon record my views as to their final completion." 

When we read this report accompanying his plans of 1865 we were impressed with 
the feeling that Mr. Walter had been influenced, perhaps under pressure from Con- 
gress, by the desire to obtain increased accommodations within the building, and 
that he would have recommended a somewhat different treatment if he had had 
under consideration only the strictly architectural necessities of the design. We feel 
very sure that it would be better to reproduce the present design in marble, as nearly 
as possible as it now stands, than to carry out Mr. Walter's plans of 1865 in their 
entirety. 

It seems remarkable, when considering the history of this building, that so l)eauti- 
ful and harmonious a design should have resulted from the successive additions made 
to the original building, the result of which is certainly a monument to the skill of 
Mr. Walter. Whatever faults there may be in the design are distinctly the outcome 
of the limitations which were imposed upon the architect in adapting the new con- 
ditions to the Ijuilding as it then existed. The Dome had to be designed in propor- 
tion to the enlarged building, and yet ^Ir. Walter found himself compelled to place 
this larger Dome upon the masonry foundations and walls of the smaller Dome. 
Owing to the fact that the foundations were built on most unfavorable soil, he very 
naturally hesitated to add upon these walls any unnecessary masonry weight or to 
disturb in any way the existing ma.sonry where it could be used and adapted to the 
new conditions. He felt very strongly, however, as we do, the defect that on the 
east front the Dome does not appear to be supported; in fact, it overhangs the wall 
of the building and seems to rest partly upon the portico. He was right in wishing 
to have this defect corrected and, also, in wishing to add another column on either 



6 EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE CAPITOL BUILDINa. 

side of the central motive on the east front of the building, thus increasing the width 
of the pediment and making the central motive with its pediment predominate over 
the two wings with their pediments. While we feel, therefore, that the direct ele- 
vation of the east front of the Capitol recommended by Mr. Walter should be car- 
ried out in every I'espect, we are at the same time certain that could Mr. Walter 
have given more time and further study to this great problem, unhampered by prac- 
tical limitations, he would have been finally persuaded not to project the central 
building with its pediment any farther east than absolutely necessary to give the 
Dome the apparent support which it now lacks. 

In our judgment, one of the most impressive views of the Capitol is obtained when 
one sees the entire east front and the Dome together, which is only possible vkdiile 
standing fairly close to the building and to the east of either the Senate or House 
wing. Now, if the central building were brought too far forward it would mask the 
Dome and destroy this very picturesque and yet imposing view of the Capitol; and 
there would be no point from where the entire height of the Dome could be seen in 
its relation to the rest of the building, which is now possible on the east front. 

We also believe that if this central building were carried far forward toward the 
east, the architectural effect of the entire east front would be injured, even when 
considered without regard to the Dome. In a monumental scheme of this character, 
three parts or architectural motives are much simpler, and a V^roader and better com- 
position, than five parts. The extreme i^rojection of this central building would 
completely destroy the present composition of three units, with its breadth and sim- 
plicity, and would not only produce a division with five members— the center, the 
two wings, and the intervening spaces — but would make these members practically 
equal in size and architectural value. That such a composition already existing on 
the west front is, nevertheless, rather imposing is to be ascribed to the fact that the 
Capitol is always so greatly foreshortened by the perspective, due to the fall of 
the land on the west — a result which could not be expected on the east front where 
the foreground is level and the building can be seen in close proximity. 

Another important reason for not making this great projection is that it would 
destroy the court-like effect of the east front where the two wings project beyond 
the simple and broad central building, one of the most picturesque and pleasing 
features of the Capitol wherever seen on the east, but especially when standing fairly 
close to the building and looking up at the Dome. 

Lastly, it would seem most unfortunate not to be alile, when looking diagonally 
toward this facade as one approaches from the north or from the south, to see the 
full length of the building as at present. The extreme projection of the central 
btiilding would produce this result, for it would practically mask that part of the 
building beyond it, so that when approaching the Capitol from the south one would 
see the House wing and the central projection, while the Senate would be hidden 
from view by the projection of the central building. The same would be true with 
regard to the House wing when approaching the Vjuilding from the north. We are, 
therefore, strongly of the opinion that if Mr. ^Valter had been entirely unhami:)ered 
by practical considerations, and if he had written his report after the completion of 
the Dome and the two wings, he would have reached the same conclusion. 

In view of these considerations, and after very careful study, we respectfully sub- 
mit plan, Scheme A, as being, in our opinion, the most conservative and in every 
way the best solution of the architectural prol^lems involved in correcting the defects 
of this fat;ade, to which Mr. Walter called attention in his report of 1865. 

Realizing, as already stated, thaj; the composition of this facade, and especially the 
relation of wall surfaces to each otlier, should be changed as little as possible, we 
have moved the entire front of the central portion forward only so far as necessary 
to bring the main wall of the building, at the center, under the extreme projection 
of the Dome, and give the Dome the apparent support which it should have. At the 
same time, we have added one column on each side of the main pediment, broadening 
the pediment accordingly, so that it will dominate the two pediments of the Senate 
and House wings, which INIr. Walter so strongly felt should be done. 

In this scheme no consideration has been given to increased space within the 
building, and the problem has been solved strictly according to the architectural 
necessities of the case; nevertheless, the moving of the wall easterly 12 feet 10 inches 
gives, on the main floor to the east of Statuary Hall, a series of alcoves which can be 
used to advantage for the additional storage of documents; and, to the east of the 
Supreine Court, a similar series of alcoves, back of the present screen, for retiring or 
robing rooms for the judges. Similar alcoves would also be obtained, in both cases, 
on the floor above, which could be reached from the central portion of the building 
and used for various purposes. These changes would in no way affect any of the 
internal arrangements or even the decorations on the main floor. 



EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE CAPITOL BUILDING. 7 

In the basement this additional projection has added to the size of the adjacent 
rooms, enlarging and improving them, especially in the case of the law library under 
the Supreme Court. 

In the central section of the building 2 spacious rooms are obtained on either 
side of the main entrance, with windows opening onto the portico, giving 12 addi- 
tional rooms for committee or other purposes, those on the first and second floors 
being well lighted and all very accessible. 

We strongly recommend that whatever alterations are decided upon should be sub- 
stantially in harmony with this plan. Scheme A, and that in no event should the 
central j^ortion of the 1)uilding be made to project any farther eastward than shown 
thereon. 

We have prepared an alternative plan. Scheme B, partly to illustrate our conten- 
tion that the building should not be projected farther eastward than absolutely 
necessary to give an apparent support to the Dome, and at the same time to show 
what, in our judgment, is the least objectionable manner, if the architectural beauty 
and simplicit}' of the east front are to be preserved, of obtaining additional space 
within the building while retaining to the greatest possible extent the present char- 
acter of the east front. 

In Scheme B the central portion has been projected 32 feet 6 inches easterly from 
the walls of the Supreme Court and Statuary Hall, adding to the building 14 spacious 
and well-lighted rooms on each floor, 7 on each side of the main entrance. These 
rooms are a^Dproached by a corridor of ample width connecting with both the Senate 
and House wings, the Rotunda, and other important circulations of the building. 
This corridor, l^esides giving the Senators and Congressmen direct access to their 
respective committee rooms, also provides a new communication from one end of the 
Capitol to the other, which Mould be both private and convenient. 

In order to olitain this through corrider and at the sam6 time avoid the deep- 
recessed courts which would then exist between the Senate wing and the central 
building en the one side and the House wing and the central building on the other, we 
have indicated on the plan, Scheme B, entirely new sections. Each of these new 
sections connecting the central building with the Senate and the House wings, would 
contain 4 additional large rooms on each floor, opening into a court, supplying light 
from the east to the present passages connecting the main building with the Senate 
and the House wings. The colonnade now existing at this point is moved forward 
to form the easterly fac^ade of the new connecting sections. 

By reference to the plan it will be seen that under this scheme 18 large well-lighted 
rooms are obtained on the main floor, and a timilar number on the gallery floor, 
available for committee rooms or other purposes. Eighteen correspon<iing rooms are 
obtained on the ground floor, some of which can l)e used for committee rooms and 
others for the services of the Iniilding. 

From the practical point of view, this plan commends itself to us very highly, as 
it provides ample and well-lighted additional space without disturbing the present 
internal arrangements of the building or its decorations. It establishes, besides, a 
new and important circulation ])etween the two wings, serving the different new 
committee rooms. It produces a more interesting and satisfactory fagade than could 
be obtained under the recommendation made by Mr. Walter in his report of 1865. 
It would be simpler and more dignified, and would preserve the breadth and monu- 
mental character of the easterly fagade; but it would be much less interesting and 
picturesque. It would be such a great change from the present fa(,-ade, so familiar 
to our people and which they have learned to love and venerate, that we make this 
suggestion merely to meet the condition which has been imposed upon us by your 
commission of reporting a scheme with added space. We hope, nevertheless, that 
this alternative plan, Scheme B, will not ))e favorably considered. 

In order to facilitate the study of this problem by your Commission, we submit 
herewith a plan of the main floor of the United States Capitol and a large jjhoto- 
graph of the east front, showing the building as it exists to-day; also a complete 
elevation, at double the scale of the plans, showing the easterly facade as it would 
look in direct elevation with the greater width of the pediment obtained by the 
addition of one column on each side of the present pediment. Sketch perspectives 
and complete models of this fayade are likewise submitted, further illustrating 
Scheme A, Scheme B, and the east front as it exists to-day. 

In the preliminary estimates, which we append to this report, as reipiested by 
your committee, giving the cost involved in the execution of either of the schemes 
proposed, we have also included alternate estimates for refacing the present central 
building of the east facade with white marble to correspond with the Senate and the 
House wings, the present design being, of course, reproduced in every detail. One 
estimate submitted is for the reproduction of the fa(,"ade in every detail just as it 



8 EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE CAPITOL BUILDING. 

stands; the other includes the suggested addition of two columns and the widening 
of the east pediment, otlierwise reproducing the present facade. 

Estimates are also submitted, first, for the i)robable cost of a sculptural group in 
the House pediment to correspond in character, size, and finish with the sculptural 
work now existing in the pediment of the Senate wing; and, second, for refacing 
with white mai'ble such portions of the present west front as are now built in sand- 
stone, the present design being, of course, reproduced in every detail. 

In accordance with your request we also submit an estimate for replacing with 
white marble the two broad flights of steps on the west of the Capitol, from the 
upper terrace to the foot of the embankment where the garden begins. We are 
strongly of the opinion that an error of judgment was made in using a dark material 
for these steps, and that the present effect is most injurious to the general harmony, 
dignity, and repose of this impressive front. This work would not disturb any of 
the white marble ramps and balustrades, and contemplates only replacing the blue- 
stone steps and platforms with white marble. 

In conclusion, we should state that during the study of this important problem and 
the preparation of this report we have conferred from time to time with the Superin- 
tendent of the Capitol, and we are greatly indebted to him for his very valuable 
assistance. 

We have the honor to remain, very respectfully, your obedient servants, 

CaRRERE & HASTINC4S, 

Con suit ing A rchitects. 
New York, December 27, 1904. 



EsTIMATB OF CoST, UNITED StATES CaPITOL EXTENSION. 

The following estimates include in each case all labor and material complete in 
place on the building. 

east front extension. 

ScheT)ie A {12-foot 10-i7ich projection) . 

Cut stone, including all steps ( white marble ) $590, 000 

Masonry and fireproofing 100, 000 

Steel work 20, 000 

Roofing 1 5, 000 

All interior work 75, 000 

Total 800, 000 

Scheme B {33-foot 6-inch projection). 

Cut stone, including all steps ( white marble ) $635, 000 

Masonry and fireproofing 200, 000 

Steel work 50, 000 

Roofing 30,000 

All interior work 160, 000 

Total 1, 075, 000 

Reproducing p>rese)d east front in ivhite marble without any changes. 

Cut stone, including all steps ( white marble) |455, 000 

Masonry ( entirel v new wall ) 60, 000 

Roofing ■ 5, 000 

All interior work 30, 000 

Sculpture - 15, 000 

Total 565,000 

Reproducing present east front in while marble ; also adding two columns and iiureasing 

the vAdtIt of pediment. 

Cut stone, including all steps ( white marble) $450, 000 

Masonry (entirelv new wall) 75, 000 

Roofing -■ 5, 000 

All interior work 30, 000 

Sculpture 15, 000 

Total 575, 000 



EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF THE CAPITOL BUILDING. 9 

Reproducing prci^ent west front in rchite marble without any changes. 

Cut stone, including all steps (white marble) 1325, 000 

Masonry (entirely new wall) 65, 000 

Roofing 5, 000 

All interior work i 30, 000 

Total 425, 000 

Terrace steps, west front. 

Marble steps $37, 000 

Removing old work 5, 000 

Masonry 8, 000 

Total 50,000 

Sculptural treatment of the east pediment of the House wing, including the 
sculptor's honorarium for the model; supplying of the necessary marble, 
erected in place, and the execution of the carving from the artist's model. . 55, 000 

Respectfully submitted by — 

« Carrere & Hastings, 

Consulting Architects. 
New York, December 21, 1904. 



ILLUSTRATIONS ACCOMPANYING 
APPENDIX A. 



11 



ITO 



y 




PERSPECTIVE OF THE EAST FRONT OF THE CAPITOL IN ITS PRESENT STATE. 





C"^,' 




£M 




UNITED STATES CAPITOL 




GROUND FLOOR PLAN 

SCAU SIXTEEN FEET EQUAL ONE INCH 

PRESENT STATE 

CQMPIUD W CARREHE i. HASTINGS CONSULTING ARCHITECTS 




I 



i 



UNITED STM'ES CAPITOL 

PROPOSED EXTF ISION OF THE EAST FRONT 
RECOMMENDED 8Y dOMAS U. WALTER IN 1565 W TH 
MODIFICATIONS SUC "tESTED IN REPORT OF DEC. 27 1904 
BY CARRERE & HASTII GS CONSULTING ARCHITECTS 




GROUND FLOOR PLAN 

SOLE SIXTEEN FEET EQUAL ONE INCH 

SCHEME "A" 



p ^ 



UNITED ST/GTES CAP 

PROPOSED EXTENSION OF THE EAST FRO»^,_„ 
RECOMMENDED BY THOMAS IJ. WALTER IN 1565 WITH 
MODIFICATIONS SUGGESTED IN REPORT OF DEC. 27 WW^ 
BY CARRERE & HASTINGS CONSULTING ARCHITECTS 




GROUND FLOOR PLAN 

SCAU SIXTEEN ftirt EOyAL ONE INCH 

SCHEME ""B" 



fmifimm-'m-^ 



^ ^ 
% . 



<ammnf^ £lE>n .^MSft mtR 




.*«; .?W:.;.:*:?'S£' 



8b. m.- 



APPENDIX 

STATEME?(T OF EXPENDITUEI 


B. 

:S TO MARCH 2, 1905. 

of the United States Capitol. 


Joint '('ommissioD, extension and completion 




Traveling 
expenses. 


Models. 


Drafting. 


Miscella- 
neous. 


Architect 
fees. 


Total. 


'•ills paid 


S161. 30 
51.00 


|1 814 00 


«9fi9 sn 


S5.38 
405. 35 




S5, 000. 00 


J2 233 48 


lills rendered, to be paid 


"733.19 


6 189 54 






Grand total, $8,423.02. 












13 



APPENDIX C. 

FLOOR PLAN AND PEKSPECTIYE, WALTER PLAN OF 
FEBRUARY 20, 18G5. 

15 
H. Doc. 385, 58-3 2 




o -^ 




\- i=> 






%. 




LBJj 



